Lei Yang

Science and technology drive research progress but also introduce growing risks, value conflicts and ethical challenges. Science and technology ethics review committees (STERCs) serve as key institutional mechanisms to ensure that scientific activities comply with ethical principles and professional norms. However, the establishment of STERCs worldwide remains at an early developmental stage, and structured, systematic criteria for evaluating their quality are largely absent. This study aims to develop a structured evaluation indicator system for STERCs and to explore its preliminary applicability. This study conducted a literature review and qualitative interviews to develop a preliminary evaluation indicator system, which was organized using Donabedian’s three-dimensional framework of structure, process, and outcome. The final indicator system was established after two rounds of expert consultation. The preliminary self-assessment data were collected from 80 medical institutions and 19 companies across 14 cities in Hunan Province. Both rounds of the Delphi consultation achieved a 100% response rate. The mean authoritative coefficient (Cr) was 0.900, while familiarity (Cs) and judgment basis (Ca) scores were 0.867 and 0.933, respectively. Kendall’s coefficient of concordance (Kendall’s W) was 0.300 (p < 0.001) in round one and 0.213 (p < 0.001) in round two. The final evaluation indicator system consisted of three first-level indicators, nine second-level indicators and 52 third-level indicators. This study proposes a unified framework for science and technology ethics review, integrating activities involving humans, animals, and other potential technological risks into a single evaluation system. The indicator system supports institutional self-assessment, promotes standardization, and guides continuous improvement. Preliminary findings indicate its feasibility and internal consistency, but these results should be interpreted cautiously due to the limited sample scope and reliance on self-reported data.

Revered as the founding father of Chinese historiography, Sima Qian 司馬遷 (?145–86 BCE) has been an exemplar of the frustrated author in Chinese literary history. Despite the monumental position of his Shiji (Records of the Historian), Sima’s background story has long overshadowed the interpretations of the book. This biographical method, which has dominated the Chinese historiographical tradition, obscures the complex relationships among a historical text, the historian, and the reader. As the narratologist, Gerald Prince, has proposed, different readers do not process narratives in exactly the same manner. Applying Prince’s analysis to the interpretations of Shiji, I argue that, even though numerous readers have consistently adopted the biographical approach, their individualized reading processes yield dissimilar interpretations of Shiji. The current study highlights the value of narratological theories in understanding the reception of Chinese historical works, illustrating the promise of opening Chinese historiography to narrative analysis.

Constructive deviance describes acts that benefit the organization by deviating from outdated organizational norms. Despite emerging interest in this behavior, questions remain about why and how constructive deviance occurs. This paper integrates social learning and uncertainty reduction theories, and develops a multilevel model linking team-level ethical leadership to employee constructive deviance. Surveying 313 subordinates and 52 supervisors from 15 different companies in eastern China, we find that team-level ethical leadership has a positive impact on employee constructive deviance, and that both psychological safety climate and employee moral self-efficacy partially mediate this relationship. In addition, we find a positive cross-level moderating effect of psychological safety climate. These findings contribute to understanding employees’ constructive deviance in the workplace, and provide valuable implications for managerial practices.

Although current literature demonstrates how parents benefit from parent empowerment programs, the development of a quantitative measure of parent empowerment has garnered limited attention in parenting research. The goal of this research was therefore to develop and validate a quantitative measure for the assessment of practitioners’ attitudes and competence in parent empowerment. In the process of item generation, the qualitative findings derived from four studies in relation to the perceived outcomes and experiences in parent empowerment were synthesized in the first stage. In the second stage, a list of narratives that articulated different themes of parent empowerment was generated, which resulted in an item pool containing 28 items. In the third stage, the research team converted the 28 items into a survey instrument. In the fourth stage, a first-scale validation study was conducted to explore the factor structure of the initial 28-item questionnaire. The exploratory factor analysis on the first sample of 366 practitioners yielded a twofold factor structure with 17 items, including practitioners’ attitudes in parent empowerment and practitioners’ competence in parent empowerment. In the final stage, a second-scale validation study was undertaken to verify the fit of the twofold factor structure. A confirmatory factor analysis on the second sample of 170 practitioners demonstrated a good model fit. The results of reliability tests for the whole scale and two subscales also indicate satisfactory internal consistency. The Parent EmpowermentviaTransformative Learning Questionnaire (PETLQ) was thus developed and confirmed as a scale with sufficient factorial validity and internal consistency to be used for assessing parenting practitioners’ attitudes and competence in parent empowerment and for evaluating the effectiveness of parent empowerment programs.

Since the founding of the PRC since the Soviet Union, the development of Sino-Russian relations has gone through three stages: from the establishment of alliances to armed hostilities, the normalization of relations, and gradually establish and develop strategic partnership. Six years of ups and downs to promote Sino-Russian relations from the emotional and pragmatic and rational direction. Between two closely around the principal contradiction, priority and solve the border issue left over by history. To promote the development of bilateral relations, the two governments have made ​​unremitting efforts, with remarkable results. In international politics, China and Russia is the co-operation to strengthen cooperation to counter U.S. power unipolar hegemony. Looking ahead, China and Russia will enhance the level of strategic cooperation to explore new ways; to focus on economic cooperation, and continuously enrich the content of the partnership; to strengthen cultural exchanges, to overcome the negative factors, and deepen long-term co-operation of the foundation. Since the People's Republic of China was founded, the Sino-Russian/Sino-Soviet relations have experienced three stages. China and Russia established alliance, and turned to the armed hostilities, this is the first stage. The two countries normalized their relations, this is the second stage. The third stage is the gradual set-up of the strategic partnership of cooperation. The sixty-year bumpy relations between China and Russia tend to be pragmatic and rational. Focusing on the primary contradictions, the two countries take the border issue as the priority to resolve the left over by history. Great achievements have been made between them, thanks to the unremitting efforts made by the two governments. The counteraction of the US uni-polar hegemony gives an impetus to the cooperation reinforcement. In the future, China and Russia will explore new ways to improve the strategic cooperation. With an emphasis on the economic cooperation, the two countries will enrich the content of partnership and strengthen cultural exchanges. They will overcome the negative factors, and deepen the foundation for long -term cooperation